PDA

View Full Version : Representation without taxation



stephanie
01-27-2007, 03:39 AM
People better keep a eye wide open on the Democrat Party...:mad:

Posted: January 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jayme P. Evans


In a little noticed, unconstitutional power grab intended to cement their hold on the House of Representatives, Democrats, led by none other than Nancy Pelosi, put forth language in a resolution that gives non-voting delegates from Washington D.C., Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Puerto Rico limited rights to cast votes on legislation.

The move allows them to vote on amendments, but not cast the final up or down votes on legislation. Further, if the delegates' votes decide an amendment, then the vote will be tossed, and another vote taken without the delegates.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer exemplified the legendary sensitivity of the liberal mind by saying, "This is symbolic. The delegates know it, but it is an opportunity for them to participate."

The Constitution is crystal clear on this issue. The 14th amendment states:

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed."

It's fairly obvious by that statement that the intent was to provide representation only for those who actually paid taxes. Although D.C., Guam, and the others are U.S. territories, they are not states. The people who represent those populations are not senators, and they are not members of Congress. They are referred to as delegates, and for good reason. The only one of the five territories that pays federal income tax is Washington D.C. In fact, you might argue that the others are public charges, since they receive so much federal aid, and their citizens pay no federal tax.

Puerto Rico is a commonwealth. The citizens of Puerto Rico have had numerous opportunities to decide through popular votes whether they wish to enhance their commonwealth status, become a U.S. stat, or seek independence altogether. The last vote came in 1998 through a referendum, and "none of the above" won out over statehood.

The people of Puerto Rico have consistently rejected, albeit by pretty slim margins, the idea of becoming a U.S. state. So if the people of the island have spoken and made their intentions clear on so many occasions, why does Pelosi feel the need to give their delegates the right to vote?

Guam is considered a U.S. territory. It, too, was ceded to the U.S. by Spain in the late 1800s. Guamanians receive hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars in aid, which carries no corresponding federal income or excise taxes. In addition, due to its strategic importance as a U.S. Naval base, the Guamanian treasury is the recipient of all U.S. federal income tax paid by U.S. servicemembers and civilian employees on the island.

The U.S. Virgin Islands, like Puerto Rico, has been offered several referenda sponsored by Congress so that the residents of the islands can also vote on their future. Like Puerto Rico, they were given a choice between independence, status quo and U.S. statehood. These efforts have failed to result in enough turnout to produce a majority of voters.

American Samoa is a little different. While Congress has not officially sponsored any efforts toward statehood, this U.S. territory has had self-governance since 1967. I'm sure with enough citizen interest, American Samoa could convince Congress, much like Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, to hold a referendum on independence or statehood.

So, with these territories so remote from the mainland, with the cultural and ethnic differences that abound, with their lackadaisical attitudes toward their own self-determination, why should they be allowed to influence our political process on the mainland? The days of colonial American dominance are over. These territories are free to choose independence, but they don't.

The last time Democrats held the majority, they tried the same stunt. The provision that delegates' votes could not determine the outcome was added to ostensibly avoid conflicts with the Constitution, The truth is, however, that Democrats, if not violating the Constitution, are at least toying with it to pad their margins on votes. Of the five delegates, four of them are Democrats.

One of the founding principles of our democracy is no taxation without representation. With Pelosi's actions, this logic has now been turned on its head. What we now have in four of these cases is representation without taxation, and that is a gutting of our Constitution, a violation of the law and a cynical power grab by the woman who – in her own words – is now the most powerful woman in America.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53966

Mr. P
01-27-2007, 10:40 AM
:eek2: And this is just the beginning of the session.

Hugh Lincoln
01-27-2007, 10:52 AM
All this does is expand the number of Democratic votes on any given piece of legislation.

But I trust the Roberts court could make short work of this bit of nonsense.

Mr. P
01-27-2007, 11:03 AM
All this does is expand the number of Democratic votes on any given piece of legislation.

But I trust the Roberts court could make short work of this bit of nonsense.

I would certainly hope so.

Gunny
01-27-2007, 11:35 AM
I would certainly hope so.

It's really an interesting topic once past the obvious power grab by the Dems. People who live in DC don't have their own representation in Congress. They are represented by "Congress." They are disenfranchized citizens as far as representation goes.

Ado
01-28-2007, 09:31 PM
Well someone has to make good on the numbers of democratic blacks, hispanics and mexicans who are prevented from voting in the states.

Can't blame Pelosi--and in fact, I say, YOU GO GIRL! :laugh:

manu1959
01-28-2007, 09:36 PM
Well someone has to make good on the numbers of democratic blacks, hispanics and mexicans who are prevented from voting in the states.

Can't blame Pelosi--and in fact, I say, YOU GO GIRL! :laugh:

prevented from voting....when where how....i notice all yall were not complaining this time around.....did ya fix all the problems

Gunny
01-28-2007, 09:48 PM
Well someone has to make good on the numbers of democratic blacks, hispanics and mexicans who are prevented from voting in the states.

Can't blame Pelosi--and in fact, I say, YOU GO GIRL! :laugh:

How original.:uhoh:

Mr. P
01-28-2007, 09:52 PM
Strong troll smell.

Nienna
01-28-2007, 09:52 PM
Well, S1 was an attempt to limit free speech ala McCain/Feingold. Not surprising, really...

Ado
01-29-2007, 12:37 AM
prevented from voting....when where how....i notice all yall were not complaining this time around.....did ya fix all the problems

You obviously have access to the internets, and I am not
even going to think about wasting my time, giving you
sources then have you say they are meaningless.

The bottom line is there was too much turnout
that republicans little loopholes in the elections
process couldn't help them this time.

Perhaps if they weren't so cocky, they'd
have tried better.




As far as a troll smell--I suspect anyone that didn't
quote all right-wing sources here, would be a troll.
Something certainly smells here, I agree.

Ado
01-29-2007, 12:39 AM
How original.:uhoh:

Well you're not paying me to be creative--so this is
what you get for free. Live with it. I'll see what other
trite phrases I can use, just for you.

Mr. P
01-29-2007, 12:53 AM
You obviously have access to the internets, and I am not
even going to think about wasting my time, giving you
sources then have you say they are meaningless.

The bottom line is there was too much turnout
that republicans little loopholes in the elections
process couldn't help them this time.

Perhaps if they weren't so cocky, they'd
have tried better.




As far as a troll smell--I suspect anyone that didn't
quote all right-wing sources here, would be a troll.
Something certainly smells here, I agree.

Yeah, it's you. What loopholes?

Ado
01-29-2007, 01:24 AM
Yeah, it's you. What loopholes?

I smell, but you want to explain something to you?

I don't think so.

My standards dictate helping people that aren't rude.

Maybe you all can spend some time investigating the ways
your party manipulates voting lists, provides too little
access in remote areas and heavily populated areas.

I mean there were organized campaigns this time
with people taking video cameras to polls to document
issues. Like that ever had to happen before this
administration came to power.

C'mon guys there are several books written on the
issue. No one can deny there is a problem.

I can't blame Pelosi at all for a power grab, and
what are we doing involved with those areas if
we aren't allowing them to vote and paticipate?

If we dictate anything they do,
they should have representation.

stephanie
01-29-2007, 02:22 AM
The problem is Voter Fraud....

Guess which party has been caught and convicted of it many times..

That's why thier fighting so hard against having to show a picture ID..

There need to be a law...If there isn't one already..

Mandatory picture ID in order to Vote...

Up here a state picture ID cost, $10..

;)

Ado
01-29-2007, 02:32 AM
The problem is Voter Fraud....

Guess which party has been caught and convicted of it many times..

That's why thier fighting so hard against having to show a picture ID..

There need to be a law...If there isn't one already..

Mandatory picture ID in order to Vote...

Up here a state picture ID cost, $10..

;)

No, the problem with ID's is that they did not inform
people of what they needed prior to the election.

You should not be finding out that your voter registration
name and driver's license name has to match perfectly
AT THE POLLS.

There is no reason that people could not be informed
a year or two prior to an election, if the rules were
going to change.

And the problem is not exclusive to voter fraud.
Our election laws are not uniform across the
country, nor are the laws enforced. And as
races get more even, and are not landslides,
the weaknesses become glaring.

Both sides engage in bad elections habits, but Republicans
in charge of elections nationwide made concerted efforts
to capitalize on weak spots in each of their districts.

It benefits all of us that these things get repaired
because now Democrats know how to use these games
too. People seem to forget that crime can be observed
and taught. ;)